DOCSLIB.ORG

Baseline Report of Helsinki Demonstrator Area Page 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Baseline Report of Helsinki Demonstrator Area Page 2 Ref. Ares(2020)2819464 - 31/05/2020 Deliverable due date: M42 – May 2020 D4.21 Baseline report for Helsinki demonstration area WP4, Task 4.1 “Baseline Assessment” Transition of EU cities towards a new concept of Smart Life and Economy D4.21 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstrator area Page 2 Project Acronym mySMARTLife Project Title Transition of EU cities towards a new concept of Smart Life and Economy st th Project Duration 1 December 2016 – 30 November 2021 (60 Months) Deliverable D4.21 Baseline report for Helsinki demonstration area Diss. Level Public Working Status Verified by other WPs Final version Due date 31/05/2020 Work Package WP4 Lead beneficiary VTT Contributing VTT, HEN, HMU, TEC, CAR beneficiary(ies) Task 4.1: Baseline Assessment [VTT] (HEL, FVH, HEN, CAR, TEC) This task will set and assess baseline for Helsinki demonstration, including calculated and measured values from one year period. An integrated protocol for monitoring the progress of the demonstration will be followed according to WP5. Task description The task is split in 7 subtasks, corresponding this deliverable to the subtask described below: - Subtask 4.1.1: Buildings and district baseline: VTT will coordinate partners in the definition and assessment of the baseline and protocol for building and district energy consumption, share of renewables, CO2 emissions and use of waste energy sources. In addition the base line sets the baseline for control and management systems. Date Version Author Comment 20/4/2020 0.1 Mikko Virtanen (VTT) Initial table of contents 15/5/2020 0.2 Mikko Virtanen (VTT) Compiling inputs from Helsinki partners Beatriz Sánchez (TEC), Jose 21/5/2020 0.3 First review of deliverable Hernandez (CAR) Inputs to Urban RES and City infrastructure interventions 27/5/2020 0.3 Suvi Takala (HEN) sections Mikko Virtanen, Aapo Huovila Finalizing the deliverable according to comments 27/5/2020 0.4 (VTT) received in the review Ana Quijano, Jose Hernandez, 29/05/2020 0.5 Fredy Vélez, Marian Gallego Second review of deliverable (CAR) Mikko Virtanen (VTT), Suvi Takala 29/05/2020 0.6 Final modifications based on comments by CAR (HEN) 30/05/2020 1.0 Ana Quijano (CAR) Final document D4.21 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstrator area Page 3 Copyright notices ©2017 mySMARTLife Consortium Partners. All rights reserved. mySMARTLife is a HORIZON 2020 Project supported by the European Commission under contract No. 731297. For more information on the project, its partners and contributors, please see the mySMARTLife website (www.mysmartlife.eu). You are permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, containing this copyright notice, but modifying this document is not allowed. All contents are reserved by default and may not be disclosed to third parties without the written consent of the mySMARTLife partners, except as mandated by the European Commission contract, for reviewing and dissemination purposes. All trademarks and other rights on third party products mentioned in this document are acknowledged and owned by the respective holders. The information contained in this document represents the views of mySMARTLife members as of the date they are published. The mySMARTLife consortium does not guarantee that any information contained herein is error-free, or up-to-date, nor makes warranties, express, implied, or statutory, by publishing this document. D4.21 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstrator area Page 4 Table of Content 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 9 2. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Purpose and target group ........................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Contributions of partners ............................................................................................................................ 10 2.3 Relation to other activities in the project ..................................................................................................... 11 3. Scope of baseline evaluation ............................................................................................................................... 12 4. Baseline of buildings and city infrastructures ...................................................................................................... 15 4.1 Procedure followed to calculate baseline ................................................................................................... 15 4.2 Baseline of building interventions ............................................................................................................... 17 4.2.1 Merihaka retrofitting ................................................................................................................................ 18 4.2.2 Kalasatama ............................................................................................................................................. 22 4.2.3 Viikki ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 4.3 Baseline of city infrastructure interventions ................................................................................................ 29 4.3.1 Urban RES (A16) .................................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.2 City Infrastructure (A14, 16, 19) .............................................................................................................. 31 4.3.3 City Infrastructure (A11, 12, 18, 20) ........................................................................................................ 35 4.3.4 City Infrastructure A17 ............................................................................................................................ 38 4.3.5 Public lighting (A15) ................................................................................................................................ 39 5. Baseline of mobility actions ................................................................................................................................. 41 5.1 Procedure followed to calculate baseline ................................................................................................... 41 5.1.1 Action 21 - 140 Electric Buses Up-take .................................................................................................. 43 5.1.2 Action 22 - Electrification of the City Maintenance fleet and logistics .................................................... 45 5.1.3 Action 23 - Autonomous Electric bus ...................................................................................................... 47 6. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................... 49 7. References .......................................................................................................................................................... 50 D4.21 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstrator area Page 5 Table of Figures Figure 1: Energy savings definition by IPMVP ........................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2: Measurement boundary definition ............................................................................................................... 13 Figure 3: Excel sheet sample for KPI calculation ....................................................................................................... 14 Figure 4: Calculation procedure selection .................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 5: Selection of the boundary ............................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 6: Baseline period selection ............................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 7: Parameters for adjustments ........................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 8: Merihaka district [figure from Helsinki city 3D model] ................................................................................. 19 Figure 9: Merihaka energy consumption KPIs ............................................................................................................ 21 Figure 10: The construction schedule of Kalasatama district [City of Helsinki, 2016] ................................................ 22 Figure 11: Kalasatama energy use KPIs .................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 12: Viikki Environmental House [Figure from City of Helsinki] ........................................................................ 25 Figure 13: Wiikki energy consumption KPIs ............................................................................................................... 28 Figure 14: Wiikki comparison .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SMART KALASATAMA CO-CREATING a SMARTER Citypicture: Riku Pihlanto
    SMART KALASATAMA CO-CREATING A SMARTER CITYPicture: Riku Pihlanto Kerkko Vanhanen, Programme Director 1 June 2021 – Local Energy Transition Conference Forum Virium Helsinki an Innovation Company owned by the City of Helsinki • Co-creating, • Piloting and • Experimenting urban futures with companies, the scientific community and the residents. Picture: Jussi Hellsten a j O a r u a L KRUUNUVUORENRANTA Smart Kalasatama Area construction KALASATAMA 2018–2020 2020 2020 Smart and City environment sustainable house ready neigborhood 2019 Kesko campus open 2018 2015 Health and wellbeing center open Agile piloting programme starts REDI shopping centre PASILA A brief history open of Kalasatama 2015–2018 Smart Kalasatama: 2016 building an district development innovation platform 2015 School open Bridge to recreation area Mustikkamaa HERNESAARI 2014 Smart Kalasatama: JÄTKÄSAARI vision Kalasatama is a former harbour and industrial operational. Helsinki City Council decided in 2016 zone to the east of Helsinki city centr e, in the Sörnäi- that the Hanasaari coal-fired power plant would nen district. be decommissioned by 2025, in line with the city’s Sörnäinen harbour was closed in 2008; climate strategy. Helen, the city’s energy com- 2013 Kalasatama was officially made into a separate pany, along with ABB and Fingrid, are developing Helsinki neighbourhood in 2012; at the same time Kalasatama as a pilot site for smart energy solutions. Decision: the area started being developed into a residential With the contribution of the City of Helsinki, the Kalasatama to be one that also offered employment. neighbourhood will be the site of Finland’s largest smart city district 2012 Home to 3,000 people, the area is growing.
    [Show full text]
  • KRUUNUSILLAT International Design Competition a Brief Outline of the Competition 20.2.2013 Kruunusillat
    KRUUNUSILLAT INTERNATIONAL DESIGN COMPETITION A BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE COMPETITION 20.2.2013 KRUUNUSILLAT • Kruunusillat is a traffic connection currently being designed for linking maritime Kruunuhaka and the future island district of Kruunuvuorenranta. • The competition area is situated between Kalasatama and Kruunuvuorenranta. • Kruunusillat is meant for trams, cyclists and pedestrians. • The bridge connection would significantly shorten the distance between Helsinki city centre and Kruunuvuorenranta. • The competition will be held to ascertain what kinds of options exist. • As a result of the competition, information will be obtained for assessing the traffic connection’s environmental impact. • The competition is international because we want the world’s top experts for this challenging task. • The connection will be situated in the middle of a national landscape. The bridge connection must be of high aesthetic quality and should be appropriate for the landscape and natural environment. • The design has to be safe in all weather conditions and it must enable a free, unobstructed flow of traffic. The City of Helsinki wants to favour sustainable forms of traffic, such as rail transport, and improve the standard of service of public transport. The bridge connection proposal meets this requirement. The bridge connection would also enhance provisions for pedestrian traffic and cycling. 2 KRUUNUSILLAT International design competition The City of Helsinki will hold an international design competition for Kruunusillat. The aim is to attract the world’s best bridge experts here to design the new tram, cycle and pedestrian connection between centrally located Kalasatama and Laajasalo’s Kruunuvuorenranta. The bridge connection would be made up of at least two bridges, the longest of which could be, at nearly 1.2 kilometres, the longest in Finland.
    [Show full text]
  • FP7-285556 Safecity Project Deliverable D2.5 Helsinki Public Safety Scenario
    FP7‐285556 SafeCity Project Deliverable D2.5 Helsinki Public Safety Scenario Deliverable Type: CO Nature of the Deliverable: R Date: 30.09.2011 Distribution: WP2 Editors: VTT Contributors: VTT, ISDEFE *Deliverable Type: PU= Public, RE= Restricted to a group specified by the Consortium, PP= Restricted to other program participants (including the Commission services), CO= Confidential, only for members of the Consortium (including the Commission services) ** Nature of the Deliverable: P= Prototype, R= Report, S= Specification, T= Tool, O= Other Abstract: This document is an analysis of Helsinki’s public safety characters. It describes the critical infrastructure of Helsinki, discuss its current limitations, and give ideas for the future. D2.5 – HELSINKI PUBLIC SAFETY SCENARIO PROJECT Nº FP7‐ 285556 DISCLAIMER The work associated with this report has been carried out in accordance with the highest technical standards and SafeCity partners have endeavored to achieve the degree of accuracy and reliability appropriate to the work in question. However since the partners have no control over the use to which the information contained within the report is to be put by any other party, any other such party shall be deemed to have satisfied itself as to the suitability and reliability of the information in relation to any particular use, purpose or application. Under no circumstances will any of the partners, their servants, employees or agents accept any liability whatsoever arising out of any error or inaccuracy contained in this report (or any further consolidation, summary, publication or dissemination of the information contained within this report) and/or the connected work and disclaim all liability for any loss, damage, expenses, claims or infringement of third party rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Totta Vai Tarua? Tulot Ja Tulonjako Pääkaupunkiseudulla Vuosina 2000
    TASAINEN TULONJAKO – TOttA VAI TARUA? TULOT JA TULONJAKO PÄÄKAUPUNKISEUDULLA VUOSINA 2000-2012 JULKAISIJA Vantaan kaupunki, tietopalveluyksikkö TEKSTIT Harri Sinkko, tietopalveluyksikkö KANSI Sirpa Rönn, tietopalveluyksikkö KANNEN KUVA Harri Sinkko, tietopalveluyksikkö Vantaan kaupunki. Tietopalvelu C4 : 2016 ISSN-L 1799-7011, ISSN 1799-7569 (verkkojulkaisu) ISBN 978-952-443-526-0 Sisällys 1 Johdanto .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Aineistot ja menetelmät .................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Asuntokuntien kulutusyksikkökohtaiset käytettävissä olevat tulot (ekvivalentit tulot) ............................................ 3 2.2 Elinvaiheittaiset tulot ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Ginikertoimet ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.4 Alueet ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.5 Menetelmät ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vastuualueet-Kaavoitus.Pdf
    KAUPUNKIYMPÄRISTÖN TOIMIALA Kansakoulukatu 3 Vaihde 09-310 1673 Ohivalinta 09-310 + alanumero HELSINGIN KAUPUNKI ASEMAKAAVOITUS 37329 Marja Piimies asemakaavapäällikkö KAAVOITUKSEN ALUEVASTUUJAKOKARTTA 5.4.2019 ETELÄINEN ALUEYKSIKKÖ 2 5 4 9 0 37233 Janne Prokkola yksikön päällikkö 8 0 0 MERKINTÖJEN SELITYKSET Keskustatiimi 37052 Kajsa Lybeck arkkitehti 6686600 ALUEYKSIKÖN RAJA 37465 Perttu Pulkka arkkitehti 37045 Marjaana Yläjääski arkkitehti TIIMIALUEEN RAJA 20534 Eveliina Harsia arkkitehti Puroniitty VASTUUALUEEN RAJA 20511 Tiia Ettala arkkitehti Länsisatama–Kalasatama-tiimi 37195 Matti Kaijansinkko tiimipäällikkö Suutarila 37197 Jari Huhtaniemi arkkitehti 37495 Raphael Padilha suunnittelija 21192 Teo Tammivuori arkkitehti Ann-Charlotte Roberts 09-310 37033 Kantakaupunkitiimi Tapulikaupunki 37027 Hanna Pikkarainen tiimipäällikkö Heidi Koponen 09-310 37497 37032 Tommi Suvanto arkkitehti 37349 Kerttu Kurki-Issakainen arkkitehti Siltamäki Heikinlaakso Landbo Niskala Puistola Töyrynummi 37478 Sinikka Lahti arkkitehti Nina Nynäs-Lundqvist 09-310 37298 37477 Milla Nummikoski arkkitehti Suurmetsä 37074 Kirsti Rantanen arkkitehti Tapanila 37334 Crista Toivola arkkitehti Ann-Charlotte Roberts Haltiala 09-310 37033 Joakim Kettunen LÄNTINEN ALUEYKSIKKÖ Torpparinmäki Tapaninvainio 09-310 37289 37285 Tuomas Eskola yksikön päällikkö Ulla Jaakonaho Tattarisuo 09-310 37113 Tr-tiimi Östersundom 64271 Marina Fogdell arkkitehti Tuomarinkylä Jakomäki Kuninkaantammi Tuomarinkartano 37469 Minna Koskinen arkkitehti Saija Miettinen-Tuoma Ylä-Malmi Ulla Jaakonaho
    [Show full text]
  • Crown Bridgestram Connection to Laajasalo
    tram connection Crown bridges to Laajasalo Crown bridges tram connection to Laajasalo The Crown bridges project will connect the coastal city districts in eastern Helsinki with the inner city. A tramline between the city centre and Laajasalo, as well as a pedestrian and cycle paths will be realised in this project. The connection will form part of Helsinki's core tram network as well as part of the city's cycling network. The project will have an impact on the entire Helsinki metropolitan area public transport system. Crown bridges Kruunusillat meets land use needs The Crown bridges project covers the tram connection The population of Helsinki is predicted to grow by as many as between the Helsinki city centre area and Laajasalo, and the 250,000 inhabitants by 2050. This poses challenges for pub- arrangements regarding its construction and use. In addition lic transport and the city structure. New residential and wor- to the tram line, the connection will also feature pedestrian king areas are being constructed in areas such as Kalasatama, and cycle paths. Kruunuvuorenranta and Jätkäsaari. The tram lines that form the basis of the project The current transport network will not ensure func- are the Central Railway Station – Yliskylä line, which will be tional transportation in the Laajasalo and Kruunuvuorenran- a frequently trafficked core line, and the Kolmikulma–Haa- ta of the future. The aim of the Crown bridges project is to koninlahti line, which will be a supplementary line to Kruu- organise a well-flowing, competitive and pleasant tram line nuvuorenranta. There are still alternative routes for the tram connection to the growing Laajasalo.
    [Show full text]
  • Ensimmäisen Maailmansodan Linnoitusvyöhyke Liite 1: Kohdekuvaukset
    HELSINGIN YLEISKAAVA Ensimmäisen maailmansodan linnoitusvyöhyke Liite 1: Kohdekuvaukset Helsingin kaupunki Helsingin kaupunkisuunnitteluviraston Kaupunkisuunnitteluvirasto yleissuunnitteluosaston selvityksiä 2014:33 HELSINGIN YLEISKAAVA Ensimmäisen maailmansodan linnoitusvyöhyke Liite 1: Kohdekuvaukset © Helsingin kaupunkisuunnitteluvirasto 2014 Teksti: John Lagerstedt ja Vesa Laulumaa, Museovirasto Kannen graafinen suunnittelu: Tsto Kansikuva: Museovirasto, Vesa Laulumaa 2014 Liite 1 Helsinki Ensimmäisen maailmansodan linnoitusvyöhyke Inventointiselvitys 2014 Museovirasto Arkeologiset kenttäpalvelut John Lagerstedt ja Vesa Laulumaa Kohdekuvaukset 1 Sisällys VUONNA 1914 RAKENNETUT KENTTÄLINNOITTEET ..................................................................................... 3 LAUTTASAARI ............................................................................................................................................. 3 MEILAHTI ................................................................................................................................................... 3 RUSKEASUO ............................................................................................................................................... 6 PASILA ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 TÖÖLÖ, VALLILA ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • D4.1 Baseline Report of Helsinki Demonstration Area WP4, Task 4.1
    Ref. Ares(2017)5877929 - 30/11/2017 Deliverable due date: M12 – November 2017 D4.1 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstration area WP4, Task 4.1 Transition of EU cities towards a new concept of Smart Life and Economy D4.1 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstration area Page ii Project Acronym mySMARTLife Project Title Transition of EU cities towards a new concept of Smart Life and Economy st th Project Duration 1 December 2016 – 30 November 2021 (60 Months) Deliverable D4.1 Baseline report of Helsinki demonstration area Diss. Level PU Working Status Verified by other WPs Final version Due date 30/11/2017 Work Package WP4 Lead beneficiary VTT Contributing HEL, FVH, HEN, CAR, TEC beneficiary(ies) Task 4.1: Baseline Assessment [VTT] (HEL, FVH, HEN, CAR, TEC) This task will set and assess baseline for Helsinki demonstration, including calculated and measured values from one year period. An integrated protocol for monitoring the progress of the demonstration will be followed according to WP5. The following subtasks are encompassed in this task: - Subtask 4.1.1: Buildings and district baseline: VTT will coordinate partners in the definition and assessment of the baseline and protocol for building and district energy consumption, share of renewables, CO2 emissions and use of waste energy sources. In addition the base line sets the baseline for control and management systems. - Subtask 4.1.2: Energy supply diagnosis – local resources: The definition and assessment of the energy supply systems and use of local and renewable resources will be led by VTT and HEN. The assessment includes the primary energy use, utilisation of hybrid and smart (two way) energy networks and waste energy resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Kalasatama Key Figures
    KALASATAMA KEY FIGURES 175 hectares Construction years 2009–2035 20,000 residents 5,000–7,000 apartments 8,000 jobs T ravel time to city centre by metro: 6 minutes Length of the waterside promenade: 6 kilometres KALASATAMA Culture and life right next to the city centre Tuusulantie Ring I Lahdentie Hämeen- linnanväylä VIIKKI 5 Main railway line km ITÄKESKUS ARABIAN- VUOSAARI RANTA Turunväylä Itäväylä PASILA m HERTTO- k 2 NIEMI KALASATAMA KRUUNU- VUOREN- RANTA Länsiväylä CITY CENTRE Well-planned construction Hanasaaren- The construction of Kalasatama has begun in Sörnäis- kärki KALASATAMA tenniemi, south of Itäväylä, and will proceed radially towards north and south. Planning and construction will be steered throughout the construction period during CITY CENTRE Kalasatama, one of the largest district construction which Kalasatama remains a place of residence and projects in Helsinki, will grow to become tightly workplaces and serves transit traffic. integrated with the existing city structure. Seaside locations that used to be industrial and harbor areas Construction and site arrangements will be so managed that related traffic, lot and street construction, storage will gradually transform into a city district where and parking cause as little disturbance as possible. Key homes, services, jobs and culture are all close by. The tasks also include ensuring a smooth flow of information waterside areas will be open for all. The construction to residents and cooperation partners. period, spanning several decades, requires from the city careful coordination and new ways of working. Kalasatama park Kalasatama centre Sörnäistenniemi The central park in the area, Kalasatama Centre consists of eight 20 to 33 Housing construction was Kala s atama Park, will become a storey towers.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysing Residential Real Estate Investments in Helsinki
    Aleksi Tapio Analysing residential real estate investments in Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied Sciences Bachelor of Business Administration European Business Administration Bachelor’s Thesis 29.04.2019 Abstract Author Aleksi Tapio Title Analysing residential real estate investments in Helsinki Number of Pages 35 pages + 2 appendices Date 29 April 2019 Degree Bachelor of Business Administration Degree Programme European Business Administration Instructor/Tutor Daryl Chapman, Senior Lecturer Real estate is a commonly used investment vehicle. However, due to residential real estate’s heterogeneous market, picking a good deal is hard and participating can be scary due to its capital intensiveness. The investor has to understand the market and know how to conduct and analysis. The paper addresses the fundamentals of investing in Helsinki under the Finnish legislation. Helsinki has grown as a city for the past years. Evaluating the city’s growth opportunities wields the investors with confidence on the cyclical real estate market. The market analysis will also show the differences between the locations within Helsinki, opening up potential for investors of many kind. When looking at the process of analysing, the research in this paper focuses the whole spectrum of it: which tools can be used to save time, how to correctly calculate returns and risks and what are the downfalls and benefits of the calculations. The methodology of hedging risks in real estate investing will cover the common fears such as rising interest rate, and will discuss the use of real estate as a hedge against inflation. The paper uses public data sources for comparative data analysis to find variables which affect the price, and draw conclusions according to the data.
    [Show full text]
  • The Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Programme Vision and Strategy 2040, Strategic Priorities 2014–2017
    THE Helsinki-UUSIMAA REGIONAL PROGRAMME VISION AND STRATEGY 2040, STRAtegic Priorities 2014–2017 Publication of the Uusimaa Regional Council A31 - 2014 Publication of the Uusimaa Regional Council A31 - 2014 ISBN 978-952-448-388-9 (pdf) ISSN 1236-679X Translation: Tiina Sjelvgren Layout: Anni Levonen Pictures: Tuula Palaste-Eerola Helsinki, Finland 2014 Uusimaa Regional Council // Helsinki-Uusimaa Region Esterinportti 2 B • 00240 Helsinki • Finland +358 9 4767 411 • [email protected] • uudenmaanliitto.fi THE Helsinki-UUSIMAA REGIONAL PROGRAMME VISION AND STRATEGY 2040 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES 2014–2017 Publication of the Uusimaa Regional Council A31 - 2014 HELsinki-UUSIMAA REGIONAL PROGRAMME THE HELSINKI-UUSIMAA REGION – ON TOP OF THE BALTIC SEA REGION 6 WHAT IS THE HELsinki-UUSIMAA REGIONAL PROGRAMME? 7 Regional programming in Finland 7 THE VISION OF HELSINKI-UUSIMAA REGION 2040 9 ” Helsinki-Uusimaa – On Top of the Baltic Sea Region” 9 STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES 2040 10 Cradle for Smart Growth 10 Easy to Reach and Live and Work In 11 Clean and Beautiful Helsinki-Uusimaa Region 12 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR 2014–2017 13 Smart Specialisation as the Framework for Strategic Choices 14 Implementing and Monitoring the Programme 14 Impact Assessment 14 STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1 : OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH 15 1.1. Open Development Environments and Intelligent Services 16 1.2. Regenerating Business 17 1.3. Environmental Business – Cleantech 17 1.4. Urban Food Services 18 1.5. Growth from the East 19 STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2: WELL-FUNCTIONING EVERYDAY LIFE 20 2.1. Intelligent and Smooth Traffic 21 2.2. Comfortable Housing and Living Environment 22 2.3. Good Work! 23 2.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural and Food Science, Vol. 18(2009): 191-205
    AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD SCIENCE Vol. 18 (2009): 191–205. Review article Legumes in Finnish agriculture: history, present status and future prospects Frederick L. Stoddard1*, Simo Hovinen2, Markku Kontturi3, Kristina Lindström4 and Arja Nykänen5 1Department of Applied Biology, PO Box 27, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland 2Formerly Boreal Plant Breeding, now retired 3MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Plant Production Research, FI-31600 Jokioinen, Finland 4Department of Applied Chemistry and Microbiology, PO Box 56, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland 5MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Plant Production Research, Lönnrotinkatu 3, FI-50100 Mikkeli, Finland *email: [email protected] Legumes are important in world agriculture, providing biologically fixed nitrogen, breaking cereal disease cycles and contributing locally grown food and feed, including forage. Pea and faba bean were grown by early farmers in Finland, with remains dated to 500 BC. Landraces of pea and faba bean were gradually replaced by better adapted, higher quality materials for food use. While grain legumes have been restricted by their long growing seasons to the south of the country, red, white and alsike clovers are native throughout and have long been used in leys for grazing, hay and silage. Breeding programmes released many cultivars of these crops during the 1900s, particularly pea and red clover. A.I. Virtanen earned the 1945 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work on both nitrogen fixation and silage preservation. Use of crop mixtures may appear modern, but farmers used them already in the early 1800s, when oat was used to support pea, and much effort has been devoted to improving the system and establishing its other benefits.
    [Show full text]